posted at 1:01 pm on March 6, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Consider this Rand Paul’s Mr. Smith Goes To Washington moment, and an answer of sorts to filibuster reform. Paul has vowed to continue his speech until Barack Obama himself declares that he has no authority to launch a drone strike on an American citizen on American soil. Paul accused Obama and Democrats on Capitol Hill for hypocrisy as well, pointing out that they were ready to accuse George Bush of making himself king and wiping his feet on the Constitution. Where are their voices now, Paul wonders:

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has launched a talking filibuster against the nomination of John Brennan to be director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

“I’m here to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination to be director of CIA,” Paul said on the Senate floor Wednesday. “I will speak for as long as it takes.

“I will speak today until the president says, ‘no’ he will not kill you at a café.”

Paul has said he wants more answers from the administration on whether American citizens can be targeted by armed drones inside the United States before he’ll lift his filibuster on Brennan’s nomination. …

“Has America the beautiful become ‘Alice in Wonderland’?” Paul said. “When I asked the president can you kill an American on American soil, it should have been an easy answer — an unequivocal no.

“But his answer was, ‘I haven’t killed anyone yet and I have no intention of killing Americans, but I might.’”

Paul spent a considerable amount of time on the Posse Comitatus Act, pointing out that the government is barred from using military force on American soil unless war or an insurrection is declared. The point, Paul says, is that military and police power are separated from judicial power for a reason, and the reason is due process. Without that separation, the executive will be transformed into a tyrannical power, regardless of whether the executive chooses to exercise that power or not. The answer from Eric Holder that “we probably won’t exercise that power” doesn’t address the issue.

Tangentially, this is also interesting in the context of filibuster reform. The presumption of both sides was that no one was really interested in talking filibusters any longer. Obviously, that’s not the case, and this one might be lengthier than others. Rand Paul is much younger than an average Senator, having just turned 50, and he’s in good shape. Presumably, his stamina won’t come into question for at least several hours, so we may get a very large helping of Paul’s views on everything from the topic at hand to the need for the Washington Redskins to give RGIII more protection on the O-line.

While I’m updating this, Paul just asked whether this power would have been so acceptable to Democrats 40 years ago. What if, Paul wondered, someone had dropped a Hellfire missile on Jane Fonda or college students at the time who were raising money for the Viet Cong? Would the same Democrats who are sitting on the sidelines now have protested such tactics at the time? After all, raising money for the enemy is arguably treason, and Paul said he’d have called it that — but those students would have deserved to get their day in court.

Somehow, I doubt that Obama will respond, but perhaps Jay Carney will need to issue a clarification in the next few hours for Reid to get his chamber back. I doubt that Republicans will step in to help stop Paul’s filibuster, as long as he’s talking.

Update (Ed): Ted Cruz has just joined in to ask questions of Paul, in what looks like a pretty smart strategy. Paul has specifically stated that he will take questions without relinquishing control of the floor, and both Cruz and Lee are asking oddly lengthy questions. In other words, they’re providing Paul with short opportunities to rest his voice, and to add more ammunition to his rhetorical magazine. Puns very much intended, by the way.

Update (AP): This thing just turned bipartisan:

Heading to the floor to speak on Congressional oversight of executive branch & rules for targeted killings. Watch: c-span.org/Live-Video/C-S…

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

I can give the dude a break on one issue. Let’s not fall into immediate disillusionment like the RINO contingent often accuses us of over one relatively minor error. If his voting record starts to look like Paul Ryan’s, then it’ll be a different story.

The answer from Eric Holder that “we probably won’t exercise that power” doesn’t address the issue.

Stalin probably didn’t exercise a lot of the power he had all the time.
Why do so when the populace fears you & you have ultimate power? How exhausting!
It’s so much easier to exercise your tyrannical powers when there’s a point to make or an enemy to rid yourself of.

Hagel had nothing to do with Holder’s response regarding the military killing American citizens, without due process, on American soil.

a capella on March 6, 2013 at 1:07 PM

True.

I was commenting on consistency.

Yet Sen. Paul voted to confirm Hagel…

I can give the dude a break on one issue. Let’s not fall into immediate disillusionment like the RINO contingent often accuses us of over one relatively minor error. If his voting record starts to look like Paul Ryan’s, then it’ll be a different story.

True, but we’re not going to find perfection on this Earth. He’s done more speaking out than anyone else.

What I find refreshing about Rand Paul is that he’s always speaking about Americans and the issues facing this Country. I haven’t seen any back room deals regarding him.

bluefox on March 6, 2013 at 1:10 PM

Well tell that to the RINO screaming crowd.
Bcs they certainly expect Jesus to come from the heavens or something.
Reagan did a lot of $hit I don’t agree with, too. Expansion of farm programs anyone?
That was shamefully disgusting as well.
But he also did a lot of good things.
Here we have people accusing Rand of grandstanding as the reason for doing this today.
People all did the same thing to Palin.
Seriously, WTF really wants to step forward & lead anymore when you’re torn to shreds by people you’re supposed to be working with?
No wonder there’s a dearth of leadership in this damned country.

That was done to appease the nutty anti-jew followers of his dad, and keep them thinking he hates jews as much as his kooky dad Ron, because he wants their vote, and when he runs in 2016, (and he will), he wants to have his fathers “followers” doing the straw poll rigging, online poll manipulation, etc.

Well, Rand has actually done more for classical liberty in 2 years than his father did in 10x the time. That being said, I reserve judgement on him about his position on Israel.

ebrown2 on March 6, 2013 at 1:04 PM

Yes because no one should ever question the US governments tactic of taking (ie redistribution of wealth) the hard earned dollars from American taxpayers and then giving it to foreign governments – such as Israel – in the form of foreign welfare.

All government mandated welfare – regardless of the recipient – is nothing but redistribution of wealth. This is another example of where so called “conservatives” love them some big powerful government and handouts.

This is why I like Rand Paul. Even if you disagree with him on some things he is at least useful unlike some of other republicans. Rand Paul is the kind of guy that can go on for a long time.

William Eaton on March 6, 2013 at 1:15 PM

OH give it time. The doom & gloom crowd will help Palinize & Romney-ize him in the media one of these days.
“He’s grandstanding!” “He’s campaigning already!” blah blah blah.
They excoriated Romney they’ll do the same to this guy.

True.

I was commenting on consistency.

Yet Sen. Paul voted to confirm Hagel…

I can give the dude a break on one issue. Let’s not fall into immediate disillusionment like the RINO contingent often accuses us of over one relatively minor error. If his voting record starts to look like Paul Ryan’s, then it’ll be a different story.

Doomberg on March 6, 2013 at 1:07 PM

I guess we’ll see what happens.

workingclass artist on March 6, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Honestly, if Reagan were running for the 1st time in today’s environment, he’d never win. Bcs he wasn’t perfect on everything & he’d be called a RINO, unelectable, etc.
I voted for Romney bcs I know is a good man. Who loves America.
Bush is the same thing in that sense. And even tho Bush did a lot of things I didn’t agree with & outraged me even, he was certainly a hell of a lot better as POTUS than Gore or Kerry would have been.
But no, we continue to search for PERFECT!
When in reality what it takes to turn things around is a good guy being prompted & reminded by the people he is governing to do his job in a certain way.

I don’t think any president should have the power to order the execution of American citizens on our soil. With that said, it seems a lot of Republicans were screaming the “9/11″ in letting Bush expand wiretapping, etc.

And I say the same about all the whining I hear from my fellow conservatives about groping by TSA. If Bush was President 80% of you with volunteer to get in line to be groped first, in the name of “War On Terror”

So to the principled ones among us, this is the reason Romney lost. Romney had ZERO core principals, and he was our standard bearer, in the name of “elect-ability.”

What if, Paul wondered, someone had dropped a Hellfire missile on Jane Fonda or college students at the time who were raising money for the Viet Cong? Would the same Democrats who are sitting on the sidelines now have protested such tactics at the time?

Sure they would. Think about it. John “F’g” Kerry is now Sec. State.

But as we know the leftists only care about their own. They can only win by eliminating opposition – not by winning the argument. They have no ideas – simply and solely a lust for power.

Let’s cut the crap. Rand Paul knows as do we all who the targets will be if the government is allowed to attack US citizens.

I voted for Romney bcs I know is a good man. Who loves America.
Badger40 on March 6, 2013 at 1:22 PM

LOL…this is the same nonsense Obama supporters use when asked why they voted for Obama. The reality is, Rombama is/was just another big government goon. You can try and compare him to reagan but you know and I know you are only looking foolish.

Honestly, if Reagan were running for the 1st time in today’s environment, he’d never win. Bcs he wasn’t perfect on everything & he’d be called a RINO, unelectable, etc.
I voted for Romney bcs I know is a good man. Who loves America.
Bush is the same thing in that sense. And even tho Bush did a lot of things I didn’t agree with & outraged me even, he was certainly a hell of a lot better as POTUS than Gore or Kerry would have been.
But no, we continue to search for PERFECT!
When in reality what it takes to turn things around is a good guy being prompted & reminded by the people he is governing to do his job in a certain way.

Badger40 on March 6, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Reagan had CLEAR principals, he stood for everything he said.

I voted for Romney bcs I know is a good man. Who loves America.

Haha typical RINO comment. Forget that Romney had ZERO core principals, all the mattered was he was a good man who loved America. crazy.

If our standards for nominating a president is that, the GOP is already dead.

Romney had ZERO core principals, and he was our standard bearer, in the name of “elect-ability.”

Raquel Pinkbullet on March 6, 2013 at 1:22 PM

So Romney was a guy that would enjoy the power to kill American citizens? He’d be a guy that would actually try to wield that power?
And Rand Paul, he’s just a Jew hater, eh? That’s why he confirmed Hagel.
Sure.
You know, IDK why he confirmed Hagel. I have no clue.
But can you consider for a fracking moment that having Romney as POTUS, Rand, etc. would actually be better than people like Obama?
Does that occur to you?
Or are such a purist that frack America, let her crash & burn completely?
You know I have flirted with that last option myself.
But truly inside I know that I could work with a guy like Bush or Romney or Rand Paul or ever for God’s sake Ron Paul.
All of these guys, & others, like Palin, West, Rubio, Jindal, etc. are better to have in charge than people like OBama.
You’re never going to get the perfect candidate that you want. It is never going to happen.
So instead of being part of the problem, perhaps we should take some of these people & try making them work for us.
We do not have to agree with every damned thing they say or do.
But I kind of think most of these types actually believe in the individual & not the collective.

Napolitano and her boss are criminals. They released 2000, and threaten to release 3000 more criminal illegal aliens.

Schadenfreude on March 6, 2013 at 1:07 PM

Not just gun running, but out and out treason! (Unless you think drug cartels are not enemies of our country.)

US Constitution, Article III Section 3 Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

…..and this facebook post from the other testicle of the gop, 20 minutes ago.

Senator Ted Cruz

In my view, Obamacare should be fully repealed, and I have introduced legislation to do so.

At a minimum, however, it should not be implemented at time when our economy is struggling so mightily, at a time when its implementation could push us into a full recession.

Therefore, when the Senate votes on the Continuing Resolution, I intend to offer a “Restore Growth First” amendment which will delay funding of Obamacare. I believe we should continue to delay such funding at least until economic growth returns to historic averages, and I intend to object to consideration of any Continuing Resolution that does not include a vote to delay funding of Obamacare.

Let’s cut the crap. Rand Paul knows as do we all who the targets will be if the government is allowed to attack US citizens.

Cody1991 on March 6, 2013 at 1:23 PM

Yep. Just have to be designated a terrorist by someone in authority with an agenda,….. BOOM! Easy peasy. OTOH, it may be an effective way of dealing with the Chicago gangbangers. Rahm may have m0re than a little interest.

Yes, Romney loves his land and Obama wants to destroy her. That’s a big diff. It’s why I voted for Romney. Other than that his pick in the primaries was devastating. I never knew why I should vote for him, not only against Obama.

His team was disgustingly inept and so was he. They fought their R opponents harder in the primaries than they did Obama later. After the first debate Romney could have had it in his palm and he let the Oaf in Chief get away, in a disastrous economic and foreign environment, alas. To even rehash it is too painful and disgusting.

In fact, the whiners from the right are more insipid than those from the left. The latter know what they fight for. They are enabled by the sissies in the Congress, most of the time. It’s why I condemn the Rs in DC more than the stupid Ds. The latter are enabled by the former, who forget how much power they are given by the constitution. They have equal power to Obama and power of the purse, alas.

Haha typical RINO comment. Forget that Romney had ZERO core principals, all the mattered was he was a good man who loved America. crazy.

If our standards for nominating a president is that, the GOP is already dead.

Raquel Pinkbullet on March 6, 2013 at 1:27 PM

I’m no fracking RINO you twit.
As for Reagan, he expanded the farm programs. HE CAVED. And they are a fracking disaster.
Romney has core principles as a man. To me, it was enough considering he was the only nominee that moved forward.
The time to start fighting against your own is primaries & such.
You’re making this too easy for me bcs Reagan was not a God. He did things wrong.
The farm programs stick out as one shining example in my mind bcs I personally know the family that benefited financially & how off of them. Bcs their daddy was appointed by Reagan to start the sham off.
And boy did he profit from them handsomely.
Reagan did have principles & sometimes he caved.
I never said Romney was perfect.
Here’s some bait.
I liked Palin as a choice better.
Tell me how I’m a RINO bcs I prefer her.
OR ALlen West.

I don’t think any president should have the power to order the execution of American citizens on our soil. With that said, it seems a lot of Republicans were screaming the “9/11″ in letting Bush expand wiretapping, etc.

Not of American citizens.

And I say the same about all the whining I hear from my fellow conservatives about groping by TSA. If Bush was President 80% of you with volunteer to get in line to be groped first, in the name of “War On Terror”

Baloney. I, and I believe most of us, have opposed federalization of airport security from its inception. It was Daschle who said that you can’t professionalize unless you federalize. Not the right.

So to the principled ones among us, this is the reason Romney lost. Romney had ZERO core principals, and he was our standard bearer, in the name of “elect-ability.”

Raquel Pinkbullet on March 6, 2013 at 1:22 PM

I wouldn’t say that Romney lost because he had zero core principles. I think his core principles were that government is the answer – he was a statist at his core. But, he tried to pretend that he was a conservative (sort of – his bigger argument for our vote was that he’d be a better statist steward than Obama), so what he was trying to sell didn’t match his rhetoric and his record. Thus, he appeared unprincipled.

Without that separation, the executive will be transformed into a tyrannical power, regardless of whether the executive chooses to exercise that power or not. The answer from Eric Holder that “we probably won’t exercise that power” doesn’t address the issue.

I remember when I/we were scoffed at by AP with our concern about Obama’s “National Defense Resources Preparedness” executive order. The EOs, the drones, and the government’s ammo/tank stockpile, who’s scoffing now AP?
…..and quit laughing at my tin foil hat!

Screw you.
Which is a shame bcs I do enjoy your points of view immensely.
I am not a fracking Romney lover nor his apologist.
I am no establishment GOP b!tch.
Anyone here who really knows me knows that.
You are insipid for trying to marginalize me for pointing out the alternatives are nonexistent & that in the end, Romney & others like him are far better alternatives than someone like Obama.
I’m in the camp that at some point I’ll cave to reality.
With Romney we had some small chance in steering America back to the Republic she is supposed to be.
But you tell me that that is being a whining Romney fan.
WTF ever.
If I had my wish, the only person who has existed that I know of so far who could steer us back is Thomas Jefferson, Madison,(not Hamilton), etc.
Otherwise, there is no one who could really do that.
But keep insulting the f^ck out of me bcs that somehow makes you feel better.
I’d vote for ROn Paul too over Obama if I had to.
So insult me some more for that too while you’re at it.